The accused's repeated absences and conduct justified the trial Court's decision to close the right to cross-examine the complainant.

ORDER :

1. By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.03.2019 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, Negotiable Instruments Act Cases No. 1, Bhilwara (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court'), whereby the right of the accused to cross-examine the complainant has been closed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the trial Court has erred in closing petitioner's right of cross-examining the complainant inasmuch as the trial Court has proceeded with haste.

3. Learned counsel submitted that the trial Court ought to have adopted justice oriented approach.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record including the impugned order dated 14.03.2019 passed by the trial Court.

5. On perusal of the order impugned, it is apparent that the present petitioner (accused) against whom cognizance had been taken on 16.01.2012 absconded and a permanent arrest warrant was issued against him.

6. Where after, he was arrested and granted bail. It is to be noted that on 28.03.2016, the complainant had given his evidence in chief and the matter is pending for cross-examination since then.

7. It is to be noted that on 09.05.2016, the present petitioner (accused) again remained absent for which, his bail bonds were cancelled and arrest warrant was issued against him. Where after, on 06.04.2018 again, in the interest of justice, petitioner's bail application was allowed.

8. It is clear that on three occasions, the presence of the petitioner (accused) was ensured by issuance of standing warrant/arrest warrant and on all occasions, he has chosen not to appear rather he has absconded

9. In the opinion of this Court, petitioner's conduct disentitles him from any sort of indulgence. That apart, the right to cross-examine the complainant was closed way back on 14.03.2019. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order, whereby right to cross-examine was closed way back on 14.03.2019.

10. The petition is therefore dismissed.

11. The stay petition also stands dismissed.